Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Rafael Mendonca <rafaelmendsr@gmail.com>
To:     Raju Rangoju <rajur@chelsio.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Rahul Lakkireddy <rahul.lakkireddy@chelsio.com>
Cc:     Rafael Mendonca <rafaelmendsr@gmail.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/1] cxgb4: fix missing unlock on ETHOFLD desc collect fail path
Date:   Thu, 22 Sep 2022 02:32:35 -0300
Message-Id: <20220922053237.750832-1-rafaelmendsr@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

I'm sending this as a RFC because I'm not familiar with the chelsio
cxgb4 code, sorry if this is nonsense.

I noticed that the 'out' label is passed to the QDESC_GET for the
ETHOFLD TXQ, RXQ, and FLQ, which skips the 'out_unlock' label on error,
and thus doesn't unlock the 'uld_mutex' before returning.

I was thinking the solution would be to simply change the label to
'out_unlock'. However, since commit 5148e5950c67 ("cxgb4: add EOTID
tracking and software context dump"), I was wondering if the access to
these ETHOFLD hardware queues should be protected by the 'mqprio_mutex'
instead of the 'uld_mutex'.

Rafael Mendonca (1):
  cxgb4: fix missing unlock on ETHOFLD desc collect fail path

 .../net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4/cudbg_lib.c    | 28 +++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

-- 
2.34.1